I Made Your Clothes - Fashion Revolution Week

April 18, 2016

The collapse of Rana Plaza, and the hundreds of deaths it brought about, has been presented to the world as exposing the ruthlessness of third world manufacturers, and the lack of conscience on the part of their big label customers—the brands with which we are all familiar.

But it also reveals something deeper, something as structurally flawed as the building itself that collapsed and killed people.

It shows us that the large-scale industrial model of garment production cannot behave in any other manner than by exploiting the weakest links in its supply chain.  That primarily means the workers.  Large scale garment production is enormously expensive, top heavy, and wasteful.  So where does the big money come from?

The ones who pay for the corporate jet can be found in the rubble of Rana Plaza.

Shari and I know from our own experience that garment production is a low margin business.

Big profits in a low margin industry can only come from a few sources, wages being the first choice of any large scale manufacturer.

So we read about factories in Cambodia where the workers are so underpaid that they are forced to forage for food at the end of their twelve hour workday.

Every day Mehera Shaw receives inquiries for high volume production, which we no longer respond to.  I have made a bitter joke about them:  “They won’t be satisfied that they’re getting a good price unless they are sure our workers are almost starving.”

No, this is not a business where you can get rich with a clear conscience.  You can make a decent living, but not to get rich.  You can have a decent standard of living, take care of your kids, but you won’t get rich.

I am old enough to remember when there were small scale garment manufacturers in the United States, mostly family owned establishments, often tucked into older residential neighborhoods, employing 30-50 people.  Sometimes they were larger, but we’re not talking industrial scale.  And they made clothes for various labels, in humane, dignified conditions, most of the employees sticking around until retirement, usually living in the same neighborhood and attending the same churches as their employers.  The employers made a decent income, but they weren’t of a separate, higher, social class.

If you’re familiar with Mehera Shaw, then you know that this is the model that has adopted us.  I don’t say that we have adopted it, because the human reality we encountered right off the bat told us what was required of us.   We saw hard working, honest, conscientious individuals, with kids in school, with elderly parents to care for.  People we respected and liked. 

The prevailing view that garment production on a massive, industrial scale is the only thing that makes sense, simply makes no sense.  True, the massive, industrial scale has been with us for a long time, and it has driven the family-run model almost out of existence, and it is the only thing most of us are now familiar with.  But to regard it as the only realistic possibility is deluded.  It is, in fact, an aberration.  The fact that it is prevalent means that we are looking at a prevalent aberration.  It has killed people, not only in Rana Plaza, but earlier, often, throughout its history, and it will do so again.  It cannot do otherwise.  This is its structure, its nature.

The people who come to work with us are people who are looking for a different way. 

I say to Shari, “We’re looking for the flowers that come up through the cracks in the pavement.”

There is a different way.  It’s nothing new.  Our common humanity points to it. 

How did it happen that so many of us have forgotten?

Leave a comment

Comments will be approved before showing up.

Name *

Email *

Comment *

---

Also in Journal